En
Submit your application

CCU: it is also impossible to fire a contract worker on vacation

The CCU, by its decision on the constitutional complaint in case No. 6-r(II)/2019 of 09/04/2019, categorically “forbade” employers to fire their employees who are on vacation or do not work due to temporary disability!

At the same time, the KSU noted that the situation absolutely cannot be influenced by the fact that the labor relations between the employee and the employer are formalized by an employment agreement (contract).

That is, no employee on vacation cannot be dismissed, since this is a violation of his constitutional rights. There is an exception to this rule, and it is strictly specified in legislation.

Dismissal of an employee which is on vacation is possible if the company is completely liquidated!

The reason for the promulgation of the decision of the Constitutional Court was the appeal of a citizen who was dismissed during her stay on vacation, who, by her situation, “put” before the court the issue of compliance with the Constitution with the provisions of part 3 of Art. 40 of the Labor Code of Ukraine.

Specifics and conclusions in the context of the incident

The citizen applied to the KSU with a request to review the compliance of the KU with the provisions of part three of Art. 40 of the Labor Code, which determines that the dismissal of an employee at the initiative of the employer is unacceptable if the employee is on vacation.

“The applicant pointed out in the complaint that the conclusion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine in her case was incorrect! He determined that the above provisions of the Labor Code do not apply to labor legal relations based on an employment contract. Thus, the Supreme Court of Ukraine violated her constitutional rights, since it “artificially worsened” her working conditions, referring her to a certain category of workers”.

CCU investigated the complaint and established the constitutionality of the provisions of part 3 of Art. 40 of the Labor Code, indicating to the courts of all instances that the solution of similar labor disputes should be carried out taking into account the following:

  1. Part 3 of Art. 40 of the Labor Code “guarantees” employees protection against dismissal initiated by the employer if the employee is temporarily disabled or resting on a well-deserved vacation.
  2. An employment contract is one of the forms of legalizing “urgent” labor relations, and its essential conditions (validity period, grounds for termination / termination, etc.) are agreed by the parties.
  3. The fact that the employment relationship is secured by a contract is not a legal reason for the non-application of the provisions of part 3 of Art. 40 Labor Code.
  4. It is obvious that the dismissal of a “contract worker”, which is on vacation violates his labor rights, as it discriminates against him, which is unacceptable, since labor guarantees are spelled out in the law for everyone.
  5. It follows from this that, the conditions which worsening the position of the employee in comparison with the current legislation, prescribed when drawing up the contract (employment contract) are invalid, and the dismissal is illegal.

18.09.2019

103

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN
Utility debts do not automatically transfer to new owners

In case of a shortage of funds for the purchase of housing, some citizens deliberately go to the purchase of an apartment or house “with debts.” If there is a significant debt for utilities, the owner is ready to sell his residential property at a good discount. The amount of such a discount usually covers […]

Supreme Court of Ukraine explained how to recover moral damage from the state

The Cassation Chamber of the Supreme Court of Ukraine has shown to citizens that the “inviolable” state, according to the conviction of many, can also be brought to justice! With the conclusion contained in the ruling on case No. 823/782/16 of 15.08.19, the CAC of the Supreme Court “punished” the state body for improper consideration […]

Civil marriage: showdown because of the apartment bought in it

Family showdown is an eternal topic! Even the array of family legislation and court practice accumulated over decades does not contain answers to all questions regarding family relations! The Supreme Court once again had to figure out whether or not the testimonies of witnesses certified by a notary are considered legal confirmation of a civil […]

Successful litigation strategy of protection in case of drink driving

Professional legal aid often ensures successful appeals against the decision of the first instance court. See for yourself how events can develop with one fresh example. The pensioner, a disabled person of the III group, was threatened with a fine in the amount of UAH 10 200.00 and deprivation of a driver’s license for a […]

One of the reasons for non-execution of court decisions of the Russian Federation in Ukraine

So, in the analyzed case No. 334/5077/19, the Ukrainian court considered the person’s petition for recognition and granting permission to execute the decision of the court of Tula, adopted in 2018, on the territory of our country. The sanction was required to collect funds from the defendant (international debt collection). The Ukrainian court notified the […]

The Supreme Court to the Prosecutor’s Office is a friend and comrade! Don’t believe? Read on!

The case № 638/8636/17-c considered by the Supreme Court, 05/13/2020, was closed by a legal conclusion, according to which the inactivity of the prosecutor’s office is not evidence of moral harm, therefore, it cannot be compensated! Initially, the lawsuit was initiated by a citizen who believes that the inaction of the law enforcement system is […]

lacomics.org